The article is dated September 2026 and aligns with pamphlets being delivered here in Ireland too. It’s not preparation for war necessarily but for things like fuel shortages, weak supermarket supplies, etc.
The article is interesting because it’s common sense stuff but also the kinds of things that are easily forgotten.
This type of stuff scares the crap out of my wife. She listens to too many doomer podcasts then talks about how we should move somewhere safe only to name a country that is far more dangerous than France.
What countries has she suggested?
When we first started dating in 2014 she really wanted to go to El Salvador or Colombia or Venezuela. Things have changed quite a bit in 12 years, and I wouldn’t call them dangerous compared to France now.
Edit: I really shouldn’t listen to my colleagues. I thought perhaps things people used to say about the countries listed above as examples were just stereotypes. My colleagues are misinformed, I was misinformed. They all seem more dangerous than France now that I’ve looked at some stats.
An I misunderstanding what you’re writing? Those all sound more dangerous than France to me.
When the hell was El Salvador or Colombia ever safe?
I work with a lot of internationals. I think those countries are more dangerous, but my colleagues and other contacts have told me that things have improved to the point that they are all similar. I haven’t ever looked into it. It could be a feelings thing: they live here and read the sensationalist headlines and assume France is more dangerous than their country of origin.
But like, Venezuela literally got bombed and had their President abducted.
Excellent point. You don’t have to convince me. I still think France is safer. But, back to the point of my comment: articles like this make people want to leave Europe, but they are misinformed.
I agree. Yes, countries should always be prepared for crisis, but headlines like this… Man. I stopped reading media a while ago due to this, but I am still exposed to it sometimes via Lemmy.
What in the holy hell am I reading, Colombia?? The country that is famous for gang crimes and such??? And so many upvoters even agree???
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
20x homicide rate compared to France in recent years!
Edit: Venezuela “only” 10x, El Salvador is the only one that is somewhat close to France, but that one we all know why… Maybe safe for externals at this moment I guess?
Excellent find. I’m going to bookmark that and bring it up the next time my colleagues from those countries try to tell me to move there.
It’s not specifically for war, but for any disruption the society might have. We’ve had winter storms which cut power for few days, wildfires or floods can leave you stranded for a while, a lot of snow might cut roads and so on. Being generally prepared to be self-sufficient for few days just makes sense. On a bigger scale it also helps rescue workers if everyone isn’t in immediate crisis after 24 hours without working infrastructure.
The pamphlet they’re showing isn’t even new, it was posted years ago.
The guideline here has always been to be self-sufficient for three days. I aim for seven.
Having a few water jugs has come handy when water pipes have burst. They usually fix it within 24 hours, and have water trucks out way before that. But it’s still nice to be able to boil your potatoes for dinner and have your morning coffee without any additional hassle.
I’ve got an alcohol camping stove and a couple of liters of fuel for it. It was cheap and doesn’t go bad.
In Germany too, there is an advertisement campaign in my area.
It’s interesting it’s coming out a bit everywhere at once: are the people in charge assuming a conflict is imminent?
Russia is intensifying its attacks on Europe. Drones at airports and other infrastructure are becoming more and more common. If Ukraine continues to push at their current rate Putin may get desperate to save face and he may try to make it so it doesn’t look like he was defeated by Ukraine. He would provoke a NATO response so he could tell Russians that he was right and NATO was always against them.
It makes sense why Europe is on edge right now. Russia has been pushing boundaries and testing limits for decades, using a mix of targeted attacks, plausible deniability, and disruption to keep everyone off balance.
You see it everywhere when you look at the pattern. There are high-profile poisonings on European soil, from Litvinenko in London to the Skripals in Salisbury. Then you have the constant issues in the Baltic and North Seas: severed fiber optic cables, damaged gas pipelines, and “shadow fleet” ships conveniently dragging anchors over critical subsea infrastructure so Moscow can just blame an incompetent captain or bad luck.
Throw in widespread GPS jamming that messes with commercial flights, constant cyberattacks, and targeted disinformation and it is pretty obvious what is going on. It is a deliberate strategy to stir up chaos, test infrastructure, and pressure NATO just enough without actually stepping over the line into direct military conflict. IMO Europe’s anxiety isn’t paranoia it’s just a realistic response to a long pattern of provocations.
Wonder if the humans living “paycheck to paycheck” will find a way to stop making bad decisions and save
All across Europe?
Let me spare you a click: Dutch households, December 2025.
Clickbait
European leaders prepare public for ‘intensified threat’ from Putin
https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-vladimir-putin-nato-drone-attacks-europe-leaders-warning/
and Sweden
And France. I don’t know why they’re lying like that.
They did their due diligence by clicking even deeper from this article, into this article linked from the post article:
The BBC are pushing similar articles this week…
